The Evolution of Predator-Prey Interactions: Theory and Evidence
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Systematic reviewConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: none
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.363
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.188
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
- Teacher spread
- 0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
▪ Abstract Recent theories regarding the evolution of predator-prey interactions is reviewed. This includes theory about the dynamics and stability of both populations and traits, as well as theory predicting how predatory and anti-predator traits should respond to environmental changes. Evolution can stabilize or destabilize interactions; stability is most likely when only the predator evolves, or when traits in one or both species are under strong stabilizing selection. Stability seems least likely when there is coevolution and a bi-directional axis of prey vulnerability. When population cycles exist, adaptation may either increase or decrease the amplitude of those cycles. An increase in the defensive ability of prey is less likely to produce evolutionary counter-measures in its partner than is a comparable increase in attack ability of the predator. Increased productivity may increase or decrease offensive and defensive adaptations. The apparent predominance of evolutionary responses of prey to predators over those of predators to prey is in general accord with equilibrium theory, but theory on stability may be difficult to confirm or refute. Recent work on geographically structured populations promises to advance our understanding of the evolution of predator-prey interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics
- Topic
- Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Field
- Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
- Canadian institutions
- University of Toronto
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- PredationPredatorCoevolutionBiologyAdaptation (eye)PopulationEvolutionary dynamicsEcologyEvolutionary biologyStability (learning theory)Neuroscience
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes